In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote
> >> > "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >> In your example you created a false impression in that person's mind,
> >> >> that's
> >> >> all. It has nothing to do with a real immoral act, apart from your
> >> >> lying.
> >> >> All your demonstration shows is that people can be fooled into
> >> >> believing
> >> >> something false.
> >> >
> >> > Believing something false....like moral codes and theories of
> >> > complicity.
> >>
> >> You can't just deceive someone then announce that means moral codes and
> >> theories of complicity are false.
> >
> > Just like the dupe who can experience false beliefs for a watch that was
> > never stolen, some folks are very receptive or easily convinced of their
> > accountability for the actions and consequences of others.
>
> Non-sequitor, the fact that someone believed your lie does not indicate
> anything about the validity of the principle of complicity. You're grasping
> again.

It think it was PT Barnum who said, "there is one born every minute."